ESA Venus Mission Delayed

MrShaggy writes "The BBC is reporting that the ESA has announced that they have to hold the Venus Mission. According to the article, contamination is being blamed. From the article: 'Esa said the delay had been prompted by the discovery that insulation from the rocket launcher had contaminated the Venus Express spacecraft. "The satellite is contaminated, so they will have to dismantle and re-mount it again," a spokesperson for the space agency told the BBC News website.'"

Comments

Re:It'll tell us something about greenhouse gases

[cnettel]

Of course, nature is not all good. However, any statement regarding the natural emissions of CO2 also relates to the question of how different the levels in the biosphere (and atmosphere) have actually been and how it seems somewhat likely that, to some degree, this is an equilibrium system on Earth where, over time, a shift will cause other factors to counteract that shift.

To me, this only means that the risk that we would be able to turn Earth into a Venus-like state is rather small. The problem just happens to be that (current) human cilization and activites are severly affected long before that. The current state of the climate might not be optimal, but many things rely on it. The worst thing is when that reliance on things being a certain way isn't even obvious to those most closely affected by any change, and/or those in power.

Re:It'll tell us something about greenhouse gases

[biryokumaru]

Actually, there is evidence concerning this very fact. The research is something like 10-15 years old (heck, I did a report on it in middle school ten years ago and it was old news).

Here's some links, Google for more if you want:
http://www.climateark.org/articles/1999/icecore2.h tm
http://www.climateark.org/articles/1999/icecore2.h tm

Here's some good images of analyses of the Vostok core samples from
http://www.androidworld.com/prod60.htm - http://www.androidworld.com/Vostok_Ice_Core.jpg
http://cdiac.esd.ornl.gov/trends/co2/vostok.htm - http://cdiac.esd.ornl.gov/trends/co2/graphics/vost ok.co2.gif

Ultimately, the data is generally interpretted two ways.

1. We're increasing faster than ever before, so it'll be worse than ever before.
2. We're not increasing faster than ever before, thus so-called "global warming" is part of a natural cycle.

Just thought I'd mention that =]. Personally, I think it's part of a normal cycle, and that it's pure egotism that humanity can think they're powerful enough to inadvertently destroy a massive ecosystem that has been in place for millions and millions of years. I mean, Australia isn't a whole lot worse off than it was when us Westerners got there, and most people say we really bungled that one.

Re:Could somebody please explain

[amightywind]

I used to work at Hughes Space and Communications (now Boeing). All satellites used to undergo a vibration test on a giant paint shaker-like device. Ostensibly it was to verify that the satellite could handle vibrations during launch. The joke was on the factory floor that it was really to clean out screwdrivers and ham sandwiches left behind by the technicians who assembled the satellite. They actually put a white sheet under the rig to catch any parts that fell off.